September Mech Speculation (2014)
#161
Posted 03 September 2014 - 09:22 AM
#162
Posted 03 September 2014 - 09:45 AM
Mott, on 03 September 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:
I don't think this comment can be stated emphatically enough.
There are sooooo many issues to fix and decent mechs to release before PGI gets around to designing and releasing joke mechs, it's not even funny.
+1000000000
#163
Posted 03 September 2014 - 10:47 AM
#165
Posted 03 September 2014 - 03:34 PM
cdlord, on 03 September 2014 - 11:15 AM, said:
NM, some pics show it with, others without....
Source
Record Sheets: 3039 shows that both the GLT-4L (on pg. 423 of 500 of the PDF) & GLT-4P (on pg. 424 of 500 of the PDF) have a Lower Arm Actuator in the Right Arm, and that both variants lack a Lower Arm Actuator in the Left Arm.
Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrades, Unabriged - Clan & Star League shows that both the GLT-3N (on pg. 280 of 364 of the PDF) also has a Lower Arm Actuator in the Right Arm while lacking a Lower Arm Actuator in the Left Arm.
Since PGI tends to prioritize the record sheet listing over artwork in determining 'Mech loadout (see, the ON1-K's SRM launcher), the MWO GLTs would have the actuator sets indicated on the record sheets.
So, in terms of MWO, the GLTs would behave like the VTR-9B or the HGN-733C - that is, they would have substantially-reduced horizontal arm movement ranges in comparison to 'Mechs with Lower Arm Actuators in both arms, but they would still have some horizontal arm movement (unlike 'Mechs that lack Lower Arm Actuators in both arms).
#166
Posted 03 September 2014 - 03:47 PM
Mott, on 03 September 2014 - 08:11 AM, said:
I don't think this comment can be stated emphatically enough.
There are sooooo many issues to fix and decent mechs to release before PGI gets around to designing and releasing joke mechs, it's not even funny.
But I.. I.. wasn't being serious...
#167
Posted 03 September 2014 - 07:07 PM
https://twitter.com/...sNoGalaxy/media
#168
Posted 03 September 2014 - 08:01 PM
#169
Posted 03 September 2014 - 08:24 PM
WalkingDeathBot, on 03 September 2014 - 07:07 PM, said:
https://twitter.com/...sNoGalaxy/media
This one? https://twitter.com/...296197598392321
That's just a Griffin
#170
Posted 03 September 2014 - 08:37 PM
#171
Posted 03 September 2014 - 09:40 PM
CycKath, on 03 September 2014 - 03:13 AM, said:
The 7K was developed 3068 however, in the present timeframe there are only three available variants the original GHR-5H, the GHR-5J and GHR-5N. Hero would have to be an invented variant.
While the actual loadout for a Hero Grasshopper would need to be invented, the "Red by Night" mentioned in TRO 3039 would make for a characteristic model.
Technical Readout 3039 said:
I'm thinking a black Grasshopper with red lightning to represent Bryant's ever-present storms.
There's also the Grasshopper of Tor Miraborg:
Technical Readout 3039 said:
In contrast to the "pristine" condition of the Red by Night (and the St. Ives Blue and Protector), Miraborg's unnamed Grasshopper would be heavily pitted and scarred (like the Oxide and Misery).
#172
Posted 03 September 2014 - 10:12 PM
Firemage, on 02 September 2014 - 08:24 PM, said:
The whole thing is super messy. The original artist sold the designs to both Studio Nue / Tatsunoko and FASA. Tatsunoko then turns around and then sells the rights for NA use to Harmony Gold. HG then turns around and issues a cease and desist to FASA.......well they pretty much go after everyone in NA producing anything resembling Robotech.
Fast forward years later and Studio Nue wins in court against Tatsunoko, in Japan. As it turns out they only had distribution rights and no claim to the actual Macross IP. Currently Studio Nue has shown no interest in taking the case to court in the US. They have Japan and HG has NA.
I have an extreme dislike for HG if for anything else that there will never be a Macross A.C.E. game released in the US.
Back on topic! As far as new mech's I would love to see anything that would go toe to toe with a Timber or DW on the IS side, though personally I'm holding out for a Vulture release!
#173
Posted 04 September 2014 - 12:48 AM
#175
Posted 04 September 2014 - 01:44 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 03 September 2014 - 03:08 AM, said:
Those large shoulder panels seem to fit the marauder quite well.
El Bandito, on 03 September 2014 - 04:05 AM, said:
Actually, it seems to be more like this:
Just drop in and ruin everything
Edited by Hollow Earth, 04 September 2014 - 01:45 AM.
#176
Posted 04 September 2014 - 02:55 AM
Koniving, on 20 August 2014 - 01:37 PM, said:
I know the MWO meta in Battletech is absolutely worthless. Heavily armored Twin AC/5 + PPC and twin PPC + AC/5 Shadowhawks are completely worthless against even stock Locusts, stock Jenners at 64 points of armor, the Shadowhawk with MWO meta is worthless! Even with a 0/0 pilot (top skill) against average 4/5 pilots. I was only able to kill one thing. One thing with 2 meta Shadowhawk try-hards in tabletop. A goddamn jeep. That was it. Meanwhile an Awesome handed them their ass.
Out of 22 targets and 36 try-hard Shadowhawk meta builds... I got one kill, and 36 dead Shadowhawks. And most fights were one on one or two on one in favor of the Shadowhawks against stock mechs.
But here.. pfft. It's all in how it's made. A huge part of it though is that rising threshold.
Nah, with a single PPC its nothing to do with the high heat threshhold, its much more to do with the fact low calibre ACs in Battletech SUCK. they really, really suck. they weigh a ridiculous amount for a 5 or 2 dmg weapon.
Imagine how bad an AC/2 would be in MWO if its refire rate was 4s.
Edited by Widowmaker1981, 04 September 2014 - 02:56 AM.
#177
Posted 04 September 2014 - 05:16 AM
I expect the Mauler or perhaps Hatamoto Chi
#178
Posted 04 September 2014 - 05:31 AM
#179
Posted 04 September 2014 - 08:26 AM
Widowmaker1981, on 04 September 2014 - 02:55 AM, said:
Nah, with a single PPC its nothing to do with the high heat threshhold, its much more to do with the fact low calibre ACs in Battletech SUCK. they really, really suck. they weigh a ridiculous amount for a 5 or 2 dmg weapon.
Imagine how bad an AC/2 would be in MWO if its refire rate was 4s.
I know.
There's also the lack of convergence spreading the damage. Which is hilariously ironic, considering that compared to the books the over-simplified tabletop game suffers from horrendous pinpoint damage!
However, low caliber ACs are super cold and heat efficient. A BJ-1's AC/2 is a 30mm caliber with 10 shots to do 2 damage. A 40mm has 8 shots (40mm AC/5 has 20 shots), etc. 80mm AC/2 has 4 shots (80mm AC/5 has 10 shots). Damage efficient they are not, but they are meant to compliment the high heat of lasers and the long reload time of the ultra powerful missiles so that you have a low-heat fall back that you can use constantly and freely (until ammo runs short). Davions love them because they keep the mechs cheap and easy to repair.
You might laugh at that description, but consider this.
Currently a Rotary AC in Battletech is what we have in MWO for a lot less weight.
Edited by Koniving, 04 September 2014 - 08:26 AM.
2 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users